I H™ 


Z ACTION 

OF  THE 

CHURCH  IN  FRANKLIN,  MASS., 


IN  REGARD  TO  THE 


Slmmrait  fed  jiarittii 


AND  THE 


AMERICAN  BOARD. 


gltto-girrt: 

J.  A.  GRAY,  PRINTER,  95  & 97  CLIFF  STREET,  COR.  FRANKFORT. 


1854. 


Digitized  by  the  Internet  Archive 
in  2016 


https://archive.org/details/actionofchurchinOOfran 


ACTION 


OF  THE 


CHURCH  IN  FRANKLIN.  MASS., 


IN  REGARD  TO  THE 

AMERICAN  TRACT  SOCIETY  AND  THE  AMERICAN  BOARD. 
From  The  Congregationalist,  Boston. 


Messrs.  Editors  : I have  been  instructed  by  the  church  in  this  place,  to 
forward  the  accompanying  Report  to  your  paper  for  publication.  The  Com- 
mittee did  not  pretend  to  present  a full  discussion  of  the  subject,  but  to 
indicate,  as  briefly  as  possible,  the  general  character  of  the  facts  in  the  case, 
with  the  general  line  of  argument,  which  have  led  to  the  conclusion 
adopted. 

In  explanation  of  the  fact  that  no  allusion  is  made  to  the  Nebraska  iniquity, 
I would  state,  that  it  was  adopted  some  two  months  since,  before  the  bill 
was  introduced  into  the  United  States  Senate.  The  same  fact  will  explain 
the  absence  of  some  other  remarks,  which  would  have  been  pertinent  at  this 
time.  I would  merely  add,  that  it  was  adopted  with  but  one  dissenting 
vote.  S.  H. 

Franklin,  March  1,  1854. 


The  undersigned,  chosen  a Committee  to  ascertain  the  facts  concerning 
the  relation  of  the  American  Tract  Society  and  the  A.B.C.F.M.  to  Ameri- 
can Slavery,  consider  the  bearing  of  these  facts  upon  our  duties  to  those 
Societies,  and  recommend  such  action  as  shall  seem  most  consonant  with 
the  principles  of  the  Gospel  and  the  claims  of  the  oppressed,  beg  leave  to 
present  the  following  Report. 

At  the  very  outset  of  the  inquiry,  the  Committee  encounter  difficulties  in 
the  way  of  calm  and  honest  examination  of  the  subject,  growing  out  of  the 
greatness  and  importance  of  the  “ vexed  question'7  at  issue,  combined  with 
the  tender  interest  and  almost  sacred  associations  that  gather  round  these 


4 


venerable  institutions.  Our  memory  hardly  reaches  the  time  when  we  did 
not  look  upon  them  both  as  hardly  less  than  synonymous  of  that  lovely  and 
diffusive  spirit  of  benevolence  which  is  the  very  essence  of  the  Gospel. 
Indeed,  it  is  but  very  recently  that  we  have  yielded  to  the  conviction,  that 
questionable  measures  were  adopted,  and  that  a temporizing  policy  had  taken 
the  place  of  an  inflexible  adherence  to  principle  in  their  management.  Even 
now,  it  requires  a struggle  for  us  to  believe  that  a Board,  formed  to  send  the 
Gospel  to  the  heathen  abroad,  should  deliberately  ignore  the  existence  of 
three  millions  of  heathen  at  home ; or  that  a Society  whose  aim  is  to  scatter 
abroad  its  precious  leaves  for  the  healing  of  the  nations,  should,  with  cool 
and  calculating  forethought,  refuse  to  send  one  for  the  healing  of  the  poor 
slave,  or  make  one  effort  to  emancipate  him  from  his  bondage.  But  facts, 
and  not  our  prejudices  and  sympathies,  should  be  the  objects  of  our  heed — 
the  principles  of  the  Gospel,  and  not  the  maxims  of  Church  or  State,  our 
rules  of  judgment  and  action. 

The  resolution,  under  which  we  were  chosen,  having  primary  reference 
to  the  facts  in  the  case,  we  will  in  the  first  place  briefly  set  them  forth — a 
work  of  little  difficulty,  inasmuch  as  both  Societies,  having  the  matter  long- 
under  consideration,  have  both  deliberately  and  publicly  taken  their  position. 
Concerning  the  A.B.C.F.M.  and  its  teachings,  we  think  we  are  doing  it 
no  injustice  when  we  apply  to  it  the  language  of  one  of  its  secretaries, 
respecting  their  missionaries  among  the  Indians : “ It  does  not  seem  to  have 
been  their  aim  to  exert  any  direct  influence,  either  by  their  private  or  public 
teachings,  upon  the  subject  of  slavery.”  On  the  great  question  of  the  age, 
it  aims  to  be  non-committal,  and,  in  words  at  least,  withhold  its  testimony 
against  the  giant  sin  of  the  land.  Its  acts , however,  are  not  so  equivocal. 
Here,  if  we  mistake  not,  its  vast  influence  is  on  the  side  of  the  oppressor, 
and  against  the  oppressed.  And  by  this  we  do  not  mean  that  it  has  allied 
itself  to  the  slavery  propagandists  of  the  South,  but  that,  so  far  as  it  acts  at 
all — and  from  the  very  nature  of  its  position  it  must  act — its  acts  go  to 
bolster  up  the  infamous  institution,  and  afford  an  opiate  to  the  consciences 
of  those  who  are  implicated  in  it.  It  makes  no  discrimination  between  slave- 
holders and  non-slaveholders,  admitting  both  to  its  councils  and  to  churches 
under  its  care,  and  employing  missionaries  who  either  own  or  hire  slaves. 
In  its  report  upon  the  missions  among  the  Cherokees  and  Choctaws,  [1842,] 
it  says  with  the  strongest  emphasis  of  the  latter,  that  they  have  a “ooon 
government,”  while  a law  upon  their  statute-book  distinctly  declared,  that 
“ if  one,  acting  as  a missionary  or  preacher,  * * is  found  to  take  an 
active  part  in  favoring  the  principles  and  notions  of  the  most  destructive 
and  fatal  doctrine  of  the  abolitionist,  he  shall  be  compelled  to  leave  the 
nation  and  for  ever  stay  out  of  it ;”  while,  by  another  law  of  that  same  “ good 
government,”  it  is  enacted,  that  “if  a- free  negro  shall  return  to  the  nation, 
he  shall  be  sold  to  the  highest  bidder  for  life.”  Of  the  former  it  is  said,  with 
equal  emphasis,  they  have  an  “ excellent  government.”  And  yet  that 
government  declared,  that  “ Whosoever  teaches  a slave  or  free  negro  * * 
to  read  or  wiite  shall  be  fined  from  $100  to  $500.”  In  this  very  Report, 


other  evils  and  hindrances  in  the  way  of  the  Indian’s  advancement  are 
referred  to,  hut  not  a word  is  said  upon  the  evil  or  hindrances  which  slavery 
presents ; and,  although  it  was  known  that  great  interest  and  anxiety  were 
felt  upon  the  subject,  but  a single  allusion,  and  that  not  of  doubt  or  regret, 
is  made  to  it,  or  any  hope  expressed  of  its  future  removal.  In  a word,  upon 
this  subject,  which  divides  the  country,  the  American  Board  has  deliberately 
taken  a position  which  is  a grief  to  the  avowed  friends  of  freedom,  and  per- 
fectly satisfactory  to  the  abettor  of  slavery. 

The  Tract  Society  has  placed  itself  in  the  same  category,  and  committed 
itself  to  the  same  policy.  Not  only  has  it  never,  among  the  multitudinous 
issues  of  its  press,  published  one  tract  or  volume  upon  the  subject  of  slavery, 
but  it  has  adopted  the  strange  and  disingenuous  course  of  suppressing  pas- 
sages, in  its  republished  works,  which  refer  to  it ; so  that  nothing  shall  be 
found  in  any  of  their  publications  which  shall  grate  harshly  on  the  ears  of 
its  Southern  readers  and  pastors ; and  when  remonstrated  with  for  such 
delinquency,  one  of  its  secretaries  replied,  defending  its  course,  and  intimat- 
ing that  silence  on  the  subject  of  slavery  was  the  settled  policy  of  the  Society, 
averring  that  “ it  would  be  the  sacrifice  of  a greater  to  a lesser  good  to  engage 
in  the  discussion  of  a topic  already  exhausted,  with  the  likelihood  of  satisfying 
none,  and  with  the  certainty  of  alienating  our  best  friends.” 

Such  being  the  obvious  and  admitted  facts  of  the  case,  the  question  now 
arises : What  are  the  duties  which  such  a decision  imposes  upon  this  church  ? 
To  this  question  your  Committee  have  given  a patient  and  earnest  examina- 
tion, anxious  if  possible  to  arrive  at  such  a conclusion  as  conscience  shall 
approve,  and  our  duty  to  “every  creature”  shall  demand.  Claiming  for 
ourselves  the  right  of  private  and  independent  judgment,  we  as  readily  con- 
cede a similar  right  to  others,  while  we  admit  that  they  may  as  honestly  as 
ourselves  arrive  at  opposite  conclusions.  Still,  looking  at  the  subject  with 
the  best  light  we  have,  we  can  reach  no  other  conviction  than  that  all  'farther 
support  of  these  societies,  in  their  present  position,  is  incompatible  with  the 
higher  claims  of  right  and  humanity.  We  shall  now  proceed  very  briefly  to 
indicate  our  reasons  for  this  conclusion. 

I.  The  course  adopted  by  the  American  Board  and  American  Tract  So- 
ciety, recognizes  a distinction  in  favor  of  this  particular  sin,  which  is  not 
warranted  by  the  Scriptures.  There  is  a general  conviction  and  admission, 
that  the  system  of  American  slavery  is  wrong.  Although  there  may  be 
some  difference  of  opinion,  as  to  some  particular  points  involved  in  it — as, 
for  instance,  whether  or  not  slavery  is  a malum  per  se,  or  whether  or  not  it 
is  possible  for  a man,  under  any  circumstances,  to  be  justified  in  holding  a 
slave; — yet,  on  these  general  subjects,  there  is  little  doubt  of  the  grievous 
wrong  involved  in  the  system.  Why,  then,  should  it  not  be  treated  as  a 
wrong  ? If  it  is  a sin,  let  it  be  so  regarded,  and  let  every  motive  Christianity 
affords  be  brought  to  bear  upon  the  consciences  of  those  implicated  in  it. 
Let  it  take  its  place,  in  the  teachings  of  the  pulpit,  the  press,  and  our  bene- 
volent societies,  among  its  kindred  vices  of  intemperance,  licentiousness,  and 
Sabbath  desecration.  We  claim  no  right  of  interfering  with  the  internal 
arrangements  of  the  Southern  States.  We  simply  contend  for  the  right  and 


duty  of  calling  things  by  their  right  names,  and  bringing  the  sanction  of  an 
outraged  morality  to  bear  upon  the  accursed  system,  in  every  way  that  a 
wisely-directed  philanthropy  may  indicate ; and  it  is  because  these  societies 
do  not  lend  their  influence  against  it,  that  we  recommend  the  withdrawal  of 
our  confidence  and  support  from  them. 

II.  We  see,  in  action  like  that  we  recommend,  the  only  reasonable  ground 
of  hope  for  the  slave.  We  say  this  because  it  contemplates  ecclesiastical 
action ; because  its  aim  is  to  array  the  Christianity  of  the  nation,  the  moral 
power  of  the  Church,  against  slavery.  Hitherto,  other  plans  of  effort  have 
been  made ; but  without  any  very  gratifying  success.  There  has  been  a 
good  deal  of  agitation,  much  feeling — much  bad  feeling  has  been  excited,  a 
formidable  show  of  resistance  has  been  made , several  schemes  have  been 
adopted,  and  yet  slavery  has  gathered  strength  all  the  time,  every  year 
becoming  more  insolent  in  its  demands,  and  yet  has  had  its  every  demand 
granted,  extended  its  area,  and  more  thoroughly  impregnated  the  legislature 
of  the  land  with  its  infernal  spirit  than  ever  before.  No  doubt  needful  work 
has  been  done.  And  yet,  it  seems  but  the  work  of  •preparation , important 
in  its  place,  but  ineffective  toward  accomplishing  the  great  result.  There 
have  been  anti-slavery  conventions  and  anti-slavery  societies,  a “ Liberty 
party”  and  a “ Frec-Soil  party,”  while  large  amounts  have  been  expended 
in  the  circulation  of  anti-slavery  documents.  And  yet  there  is  probably  less 
public  feeling  upon  the  subject  now  than  there  was  a few  years  since,  and  so 
far  as  political  strength  is  concerned,  there  is  far  less  now  than  there-  was 
two  or  three  years  ago.  And  this  apathy  is  the  more  significant  and  alarm- 
ing, because  it  follows  so  closely  upon  the  most  daring  and  successful  inroads 
of  the  skive  power.  Texas  has  been  annexed,  the  Mexican  war  has  been 
fought,  and  the  Fugitive-Slave  Bill  has  been  enacted,  with  all  then-  cost  of 
infamy,  blood,  and  treasure,  and  yet  the  public  mind  is  settling  down  into 
an  unmurmuring  acquiescence  in  what  is  deemed  inevitable.  Of  course 
mere  anti-slavery  societies  will  languish,  political  organizations  will  fail  of 
success,  and  efforts  in  these  directions  will  be  intermitted.  And  the  reason 
for  this  failure  is  found  in  the  motives  which  have  actuated  too  many  who 
have  enlisted  in  these  forms  of  anti-slavery  action. 

From  the  mere  impulse  of  sympathy  for  the  oppressed  and  indignation 
against  the  oppressor,  the  love  of  agitation  for  its  own  sake,  or  the  hope  of 
political  success  or  aggrandizement,  great  numbers  have  hitherto  acted. 
But  sympathy  and  indignation,  although  powerful  for  the  moment,  lose 
their  energy  by  the  lapse  of  time ; agitation,  for  its  own  sake,  wears  out  and 
loses  its  zest ; while  they  who  embarked  in  the  cause  for  political  prominence 
and  preferment,  will  desert  it  when  they  fail  of  securing  the  object  of  their 
aim.  The  great  want  of  the  anti-slavery  movemeat  has  been  the  conscience 
of  the  nation.  Although  its  moral  features  are  its  most  prominent  and  ruling 
features,  it  is  a sad  thought,  that  the  religion  of  the  nation  has  not  been 
arrayed  on  its  side.  Many  noble  exceptions  there  have  been  and  are  now ; 
but  for  the  position  that  the  Church,  as  a whole,  has  not  been  on  the  side  of 
the  oppressed,  there  is  too  much  evidence.  With  a bad  spirit  and  an  evil 


7 


aim,  the  American  Church  has  been  styled  the  bulwark  of  American  slavery ; 
and  men  seeing  that  spirit  and  aim,  have  dismissed  the  remark  as  a libel, 
without  looking  into  the  matter  to  ascertain  how  much  foundation  there  is 
in  fact  for  it.  And  yet,  we  have  no  less  authority  than  that  of  Rev.  Albert 
Barnes  for  the  assertion,  that  “There  is  no  power  out  of  the  Church  that 
could  sustain  slavery  an  hour,  if  it  were  not  sustained  in  it.”  The  Church, 
with  its  three  millions  of  members,  and  its  more  than  half  a million  of  voters, 
if  arrayed  against  it,  must  so  weaken  as  ultimately  to  destroy.  And  never 
was  there  a time  when  the  help  of  conscience  and  the  religious  element  was 
more  needed.  Other  means  are  failing,  mere  worldly  expedients  have  been 
found  wanting  in  that  persistence  which  the  removal  of  such  an  evil  demands. 
Let  the  Church  come  to  the  rescue ; let  Christians  withdraw  all  countenance 
and  support ; let  the  conscience  of  the  nation  be  arrayed  against  the  system 
of  oppression ; and  there  is  yet  hope  for  the  slave.  Permit  things  to  remain 
as  they  are,  and  no  ray  of  hope  dawns  for  him  in  the  future.  But  how  shall 
Christians  bring  the  force  of  their  opposition  to  bear  upon  the  accursed 
institution  ? Many  ways  suggest  themselves.  The  only  one,  we  are  careful 
now  to  mention,  is  that  proposed  in  the  Report,  the  withdrawal  of  their 
confidence  and  support  from  those  benevolent  societies  that  ignore  the  claims 
of  the  slave.  Let  the  churches  of  the  North  do  that,  and  the  same  sentiment 
and  moral  power  that  impels  them  to  do  this,  will  invent  and  put  in  requisi- 
tion other  means  for  the  furtherance  of  the  same  purpose.  And  it  is  country 
churches,  Christians  in  the  rural  districts,  acting  on  their  own  independent 
rights  and  responsibilities,  that  must  take  the  lead.  Metropolitan  churches, 
ecclesiastical  dignitaries,  are  too  near  the  fountain  of  commercial  and  politi- 
cal influence,  and  too  much  dependent  upon  them,  to  take  the  first  step. 
They  may  follow,  when  the  country  churches  set  themselves  right,  and 
assume  their  true  position. 

III.  The  only  remaining  reason  we  would  urge  for  withdrawing  our  sup- 
port from  the  American  Board  and  Tract  Society,  is  the  importance  of  sus- 
taining those  societies  whose  main  object  is  the  same , and  which  have  talcen 
the  true  position  upon  the  subject  of  slavery.  The  course  pursued  by  the 
other  societies  has  alienated  the  confidence  and  support  of  thousands,  who 
will  no  longer  contribute  to  their  funds.  These  contributions  would  be 
entirely  lost  to  the  cause  of  benevolence,  at  least  to  these  departments  of 
benevolent  effort,  unless  channels  can  be  opened,  uncontaminated  by  all 
complicity  with  American  slavery.  To  gather  up  these  funds,  which  would 
otherwise  be  lost  to  a common  cause,  the  American  Missionary  Association 
and  the  “ Reform  Book  and  Tract  Society”  have  been  formed.  Both  your 
Committee  deem  worthy  of  confidence;  and  both  appeal  for  support,  to  that 
portion  of  the  Christian  and  benevolent  community  whose  existence  called 
them  into  being.  If,  therefore,  there  are  those  who  believe,  that  the  Board 
and  Tract  Society  occupy  questionable  ground,  that  they  are  too  much 
implicated  with  the  dark  system  of  oppression  which  disgraces  our  land 
and  age,  then  it  seems  to  us  that  they  should  lend  their  influence  and  sup- 
port to  the  new  Society.  We  do  not  doubt  that  the  old  Societies  are  doing 
good,  and  we  rejoice  in  that  good.  They,  however,  have  all  the  advantage 


8* 


of  age  and  preoccupation  of  the  ground ; they  have  the  prestige  of  rank, 
wealth,  and  conservatism,  and  are  certain  of  support  from  those  classes,  in 
the  Church  and  community,  who  have  compelled  them  to  occupy  and  main- 
tain their  present  position.  The  cities  and  central  influences  of  the  Church 
are  arrayed  in  them  support.  The  new  societies-  must  depend  upon  the 
scattered  elements  of  feeling,  as  they  are  more  generally  diffused  through 
the  country  churches  and  congregations.  Of  course,  relatively,  it  seems  to 
us,  they  have  stronger  claims  upon  our  support.  Granting,  therefore,  that 
our  sympathies,  and  the  tender  associations  of  the  past,  bind  us  strongly  to 
the  old  societies — granting,  too,  that  they  are  doing  good,  it*seems  to  us 
that  the  claims  of  the  new  societies  are  paramount,  and  should  receive  our 
support. 

If,  however,  there  are  those  who  do  not  look  at  the  matter  in  the  same 
light  with  us,  we  would  still  recognize  the  claim  of  the  old  organization,  and 
would  recommend  that  equal  opportunity  be  given  to  contribute  to  them 
as  to  the  new.  All  of  which  is  respectfully  submitted. 


